Closed Bug 882764 Opened 11 years ago Closed 11 years ago

[x-tags.org] Don't bury the lead

Categories

(Developer Ecosystem :: Web Components, defect)

x86
macOS
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED WONTFIX

People

(Reporter: wenzel, Unassigned)

References

Details

The current tag lines on x-tags.org read:

"X-Tag - The Custom Elements Polylib"

and

"X-Tag is a small JavaScript library, created and supported by Mozilla, that brings Web Components Custom Element capabilities to all modern browsers".

That's nice, but is missing the point. Let's lead with what people get and then explain to them why this is cool and different, not the other way around.


Alternative suggestions:

"x-tags: web components for modern browsers"

"x-tags is a UI library for modern browsers. It uses the evolving W3C web components standard to make web development faster and easier."

However we phrase it, it needs to be clear that what people get is not merely a shim for a new standard. They get **UI components** based on a modern standard. We can then, secondarily, explain all we want about the standard and the polyfill. But let's not take the second step before the first.
(In reply to Fred Wenzel [:wenzel] from comment #0)
> Alternative suggestions:
> 
> "x-tags: web components for modern browsers"
> 
> "x-tags is a UI library for modern browsers. It uses the evolving W3C web
> components standard to make web development faster and easier."
> 
> However we phrase it, it needs to be clear that what people get is not
> merely a shim for a new standard. They get **UI components** based on a
> modern standard. We can then, secondarily, explain all we want about the
> standard and the polyfill. But let's not take the second step before the
> first.

To be clear, the .org site is primarily focused on introducing developers to the component concept and equipping them to use X-Tag - they should be getting UI components from X-UI (in the short term) and Mozilla's official set of Custom Elements (in the medium term).

X-Tag is not a UI library - it is a "make any type of custom element you choose in a simple, clean way" library. I feel we should use UI-component-specific language where we're delivering UI components, make sense?
(In reply to Daniel Buchner [:dbuc] from comment #1)
> (In reply to Fred Wenzel [:wenzel] from comment #0)
> > Alternative suggestions:
> > 
> > "x-tags: web components for modern browsers"
> > 
> > "x-tags is a UI library for modern browsers. It uses the evolving W3C web
> > components standard to make web development faster and easier."

Adding a reference to the standards and that it makes app development easier seems fine.
If I understand you right, you're saying x-tags.org should not be the delivery mechanism of Mozilla's web-components-driven UI library? If so, where do you suggest that should live instead?

And, frankly, do you think users will understand the difference? The web components shim itself is a very abstract concept, and I'd rather lead with the concrete benefits, and then tell them how to build their own, than telling them they can build anything they want and then make the actual library an afterthought?

I don't think that we're doing a disservice to the core x-tag shim if we say "Look at our cool components! WOOO!" and then mention "hey if you want to make your own components, this is how".
(In reply to Fred Wenzel [:wenzel] from comment #3)
> If I understand you right, you're saying x-tags.org should not be the
> delivery mechanism of Mozilla's web-components-driven UI library? If so,
> where do you suggest that should live instead?

My intent was to surface them in the Design and Code sections of App/Dev Hub, with mentions of it on the front page. 

> And, frankly, do you think users will understand the difference? The web
> components shim itself is a very abstract concept, and I'd rather lead with
> the concrete benefits, and then tell them how to build their own, than
> telling them they can build anything they want and then make the actual
> library an afterthought?

As implied above, I wouldn't point our app developers at a different site. I intended to push Mozilla Custom Elements via a single ZIP on Dev Hub under Design and Code.

> I don't think that we're doing a disservice to the core x-tag shim if we say
> "Look at our cool components! WOOO!" and then mention "hey if you want to
> make your own components, this is how".

Sure, I we can add more UI focused component references on X-Tags.org, but we should be sending devs to Dev Hub in the first place ;)
(In reply to Daniel Buchner [:dbuc] from comment #4)
> (In reply to Fred Wenzel [:wenzel] from comment #3)
> > If I understand you right, you're saying x-tags.org should not be the
> > delivery mechanism of Mozilla's web-components-driven UI library? If so,
> > where do you suggest that should live instead?
> 
> My intent was to surface them in the Design and Code sections of App/Dev
> Hub, with mentions of it on the front page. 

Fair enough. x-tags.org is inconsistent at the moment either way, then. If it's just the core shim, then the download link should not point at the packager, instead it should point only at the polyfill, or better yet at the x-tag template including the polyfill that someone can use to make a tag.

Also the presence of UI components on that page is confusing then. If the site is only about the architectural innovation that is web components, then we should make clear that you can't download the maps tag here, this is merely a thing you can make with this technology. "If you want to see a UI library built on this technology (including the tags shown here), go to <devhub link>".

x-tags.org needs to pick an identity and stick with it :)
I think I'm just now beginning to understand how everything is laid out, and that's *me* who works on the same team as you guys and has been looking at it for a long time. I think x-tags has gone through several iterations, and the messaging needs to be updated to reflect what it has become.

I'm cool with creating a UI bundle outside of x-tags, as long as we name it something else. It should be a Mozilla UI library of some sorts that utilizes x-tags to make it work.

x-tags.org itself should be updated to clearly state that it extends the Web Components API, and brings this list of features to it: <list features here>. The current messaging on the site is way too generic and makes it confusing to figure out how everything is separated.
Okay now that we've established what x-tag is (a convenience library on top of the W3C web components standard) and isn't (a UI library), let's clarify this on x-tags.org to remove any confusion. I'll close this bug and file a followup for what we've figured out.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.